The myth of 'liberal media'

By Robert Polack Jr.

The myth of the "liberal media" is just that: a myth. The argument usually given to prove this myth is the percentage of news personnel who claim to be liberal. It seems that Dan Rather and John Doe, the local reporter, tend to say they are liberal, and so it is claimed the media are liberal. This ignores a number of critical factors.

First, mainstream media have gone through an unprecedented period of consolidation in recent years, with just a few major corporations like Disney and Viacom now controlling truly massive empires including the major TV networks. The board members of these parent corporations are commonly directors on corporate boards of other industries ranging from defense to agriculture.

Predictably, the vast majority of these privileged elites have an extremely conservative, free-market, free-trade, economic agenda.

Although such parent entities seldom interfere directly in media programming, it would be naïve to assume that they are without influence.

Similarly, advertising has been shown to have a chilling effect on the news. Who doubts that an editor might shy away from stories that would upset advertisers? Is CBS more or less likely to criticize Wal-Mart when it is footing the bill? Will the networks be more or less inclined to present views that are critical of NAFTA or offshore tax shelters when their advertisers and parent entities benefit from such policies?

It's easy to imagine that young reporters -- in spite of personal views -- quickly learn that certain subjects are off limits. The notion that such a reporter's politics have significant influence on the media product is like saying that the line workers at Ford design the cars.

Also, investigative reporting has now been replaced by public relations departments. Instead of investigating a story, today's reporter is more likely to receive a prepared statement by the Pentagon, Cargill, Monsanto or whomever. This collusion between the media and corporate public relations obviously contributes to a big business bias in news content.

If the press were really liberal, we'd expect to see regular front-page stories on child poverty, the affordable housing crisis in America, and on how to survive on $7 an hour. Do we see this? We'd also expect a lively, pro-labor section in every major newspaper. Instead, we find an extensive business section, clearly geared toward the interests and concerns of the wealthy.

In regard to television, research studies have revealed that the number of guest experts used in interpreting news events is overwhelmingly skewed toward the right, with the majority originating from corporate-funded think tanks like the Cato Institute and the Heritage Foundation.

There has also been an important shift in the focus of the media.

Coverage has tended to shift away from economic issues like the quality of U.S. jobs, corporate tax evasion and universal health care and toward cultural issues. Free trade, as one example, is routinely treated by the mainstream media as beyond serious debate. I would suggest that this also belies a deep, ideological influence.

At the same time, cultural issues like abortion and gay rights -- issues with few economic repercussions -- have become the central focus of coverage and politics. The overall result of this shift toward cultural issues is a relatively superficial appearance of political debate that does not threaten a deeper, conservative, economic agenda.

Polls giving the percentage of Americans who call themselves "liberals" must be viewed with skepticism. The word "liberal" has been so demonized by talk radio -- which we note is overwhelmingly conservative -- that many Americans will not claim it. More accurate are the many studies showing that a majority of Americans are liberal on numerous specific issues like universal health care.

Finally, I'll add that one may quickly confirm that our mainstream media are conservative by simply exploring the news outlets of any European democracy. They all present real liberal issues and views as well as conservative and moderate views. This contrast between European and U.S. media is as immediately evident as it is disturbing in its implications.

You will know a viable democracy, in part, by the free flow of a broad spectrum of information and opinions. One responsibility of the press, as given in the Constitution, is to monitor those in power. At this time, the mainstream press is failing in both of these critical areas.

With that said, kudos to editor Joe Sullivan and the Southeast Missourian, which is clearly a miniature oasis of open, democratic debate.

Robert Polack Jr. of Cape Girardeau is an assistant professor of social work at Southeast Missouri State University.